The Conners (2018– ) User Reviews

Negative reviews from Roseanne supporters most likely

[tzk12 · 6/10 · 13 November 2018]

The show is still good. Yes, it's obvious Roseanne's voice is missing, but the show is good on it's own merit, not just because of one personality. I actually like it better cuz I find Roseanne's voice jarring and annoying, but she can be funny. lol! I will continue to watch the show since I like the storylines and it's still funny to me.

It's getting better as it goes along.

[bigcat2400 · 7/10 · 13 December 2018]

The first few episodes of this season were kind of a downer and only sorta funny but after that it slowly got some of the biting humor back that the original series had. Once they got away from Roseann's death and back to daily life things, the show started getting better. I'm glad I stuck with it and gave it a chance.

Pretty funny, even without R.

[joellyn-mumcian · 7/10 · 17 October 2018]

I hope this gets some other "better" reviews. The 1 and the 3 ratings I thought were unnecessarily harsh. I thought "The Conner's" was a pretty fair re-boot. It was funny, sad in the right places, and I really didn't miss Roseanne. Maybe those other reviews were from die hard Rosanna Barr fans.

It just isn't working.

[ShartyMcFly · 4/10 · 26 November 2018]

I have watched all the episodes so far because I want to like this show. I loved the original and still enjoy the reruns so much. However, the new show is simply not good. I love Laurie Metcalf but she is horribly overplaying her character much like she did in the original runs last season. I don't know who told her this was the way to go, but it's awful. Goodman looks bored and seems like he's forcing his lines. Sara Gilbert seems to be trying to fill the void left by Roseanne and she's just not up to it. Darlene was an interesting teenage character but her flat, monotone one-liners just don't deliver. As for the rest of the cast, there's too many extra characters and very little character development. If I'm supposed to care about any of the grandkids, they need to be featured more than a couple minutes each week. What made the original so good was the relationships - Roseanne was at the center of that with Dan, Jackie, Becky and Darlene. I gave it a chance, I think I'll stick with the reruns and take a pass on this.

I liked it.

[thoopous11 · 9/10 · 18 October 2018]

Maybe some if these bad reviews are not based on the show itself but on people's anger that Rosanne was fired. I thought the writing and the acting were as good as anything in the original. Rosanne picked the cast and set the tone so I guess that's a tribute to her. I thought her tweets were offensive but she's a comedienne, not the president, so holding her to a higher standard seems kind of unfair. . I think the show will go on without her. Darlene was always my favorite character anyway.

Terrible writing with no humor

[wienke-38620 · 3 August 2019]

I thought Goodman could still carry this show without Roseanne. I was wrong. I guess this is what you get when you show zero loyalty to the woman who built your careers. Pretty disappointing ending to a really funny show.

Not that bad

[lthunting · 7/10 · 22 November 2018]

Its not as bad as everyone says. Its not as good without roseanne but pretty good. My biggest problem with it is that its not as funny as it should be. Its kind of depressing.

Started at a solid 5 and has moved downhill from there

[Nyssareen_77 · 2/10 · 7 March 2022]

This show started out at a solid 5. Despite the sudden loss of the driving force of the show, the first season of The Conners seemed to do a decent job. They highlighted how an average family can weather poverty and loss while also dealing with the generational conflicts that will naturally happen when you have three generations trying to inhabit the same space without killing each other. In the second season it started slipping, and has continued to do so ever since. Now in season 4 we have reached a generous 2/10 and absolutely NONE of the original magic is left. It is almost entirely filled with this or that political/social agenda and the acting and writing have both become painful to witness. No matter what your opinion of Rosanne's politics is, anyone who is being honest has to admit that the original series was awesome (until we got to season 9 and things started to go seriously off the rails) where this show started off average at best and is now a complete dumpster fire.

I like it

[maseyjean · 8/10 · 27 October 2018]

Yes, it sucks that Roseanne is absent, but I've always enjoyed the supporting cast. I think that they're holding their own pretty well in this series. It's funny to me and it doesn't feel much different than the original series, other than the obvious being that Rosie isn't there. Great acting here and I can appreciate it.

Surprisingly good

[ragana · 7/10 · 17 October 2018]

I didn't think it would work without Roseanne but I also didn't think a new Star Trek series would work after the original. The humor is intact, the relationships are strong, Roseanne's death is dealt with in a dark, sad, and culturally appropriate manner. It's an excellent jumping off point for the show, future story lines, and character growth. It has the makings of being just as wonderful as the original if people can just get past their "It's Kirk or nothing!" I mean "It's Roseanne or nothing!" attitude.

How Hollywood Imagines the Lower Class Lives

[amexspam · 2/10 · 10 March 2022]

The writing of the early years of the Roseanne show was based on memories, and recent realities, of actual "working class" people. "The Connors" writers are - based on their bios - all millionaire Hollywood sexagenarians, living in Mailibu, that grew up in upper middle class homes, attended Ivy league schools, and went up from there...Top 1% clueless cultural misappropriation. This still might work if the show was at all funny, but it simply isn't.

It's not Roseanne, but it's Good!

[peggy-zelaya · 8/10 · 18 November 2018]

As a devout Roseanne viewer who has seen every Roseanne episode at least 10 times it was hard for me to hear of her firing and the show getting cancelled. I was reluctant about "The Conners" but I found that it is just as funny. It really is. Aunt Jackie is great and Dan carries the show well. I will say that I HATE the opening of the show without Roseanne's laugh. They should have totally changed it. That's the only reason I'm giving it an 8.

Not that bad

[Tron_Swanson · 6/10 · 17 October 2018]

So the first episode of Roseanneless Roseanne actually isn't really that bad.

The main stand outs for me are definitely Dan and Jackie. The way the Jackie goes full neurotic around the house because she doesn't want to leave for fear she would be leaving Roseanne is great. Another high point is Dan in all his John Goodman goodness. He's still got jokes and is still one of the funniest characters on the show. His emotional moments were on point too. And the way they handled Mark coming out to Dan was sweet.

The only bad I really saw was the scene where the family finds out it was an OD that killed Roseanne felt kinda forced.

Overall I think this could be a decent show despite the absence of Rosanne.

No humor.

[dockirby · 4/10 · 14 January 2021]

This show has lost it's sense of humor. Very depressing.

I tried. It's bombed without Roseanne

[michael-03303 · 1/10 · 24 November 2018]

I've watched all five eps to date. I just can't watch any more. It's not funnny. Poorly written and lackluster. It's such a shame. Roseanne was a staple of my youth. Without her this show is terrible.

Glad I gave it a view........Two Thumps Up!

[mija288 · 8/10 · 17 October 2018]

It's amazing how many chose to go low with their review without ever watching the show or, DID watch it but went into it with plans to be negative no matter what. In my opinion, the premiere episode was VERY good and I wasn't expecting it to be but I chose to give it an honest shot with my only real disappointment coming with the fact Roseanne Barr made the choices she did. I WILL be a regular viewer and I'm proud of the cast AND crew for trusting in their belief that there was still a story to tell and they were up to the challenge.

I liked the first episode

[davelynch16 · 21 November 2018]

I see a lot of bad reviews giving 1/10 I will leave my rating until I watch it some more. I found the first episode both funny and a little touching. The jokes were similar. The same sarcastic tone. It's sort of strange that an actress can get fired from a popular show for making a comment that very few people Barr (excuse the pun) the media were following anyway, while the President of the United States can get away with just about anything. To sum up, episode one is a fitting tribute to the show's former title character. I'll give episode one 9/10 and save my rating based on the first series, of which I will be following.

Of course

[elevatormaniacgames · 7/10 · 17 October 2018]

Of course everyone will review one stars because Roseanne is gone

Seriously?

[sarah_sle · 1/10 · 11 April 2021]

Is this show a joke? It seems so! The acting and parody to today's life is! Get real! The Rosanne show use to be great because real people could relate to it and it made us laugh! This crap just makes me cringe!! Stop Already!! You're all embarrassing yourselves!!

Funny

[ZoeZ1 · 10/10 · 15 November 2018]

I wasn't sure how this would come together without Roseanne. The first episode seemed awkward but the cast now seems to have found its groove. The last episode was great and was funny throughout. I hope they can maintain the momentum.

What's with the one star ratings??

[michellepugh-964-461455 · 7/10 · 29 November 2018]

Get over it people, Rosanne is not on the show. It's funny, even without Rosanne. Sheesh.

They Lost What Made Roseanne...

[edwardknapp · 1/10 · 18 August 2021]

Show lacks timing, presence, and humor. The Leftist agenda they are trying to program Americans with is and has ruined this show and our country at large. Anyone who enjoyed Roseanne will be severely disappointed with this reboot.

It's going to fine

[waynetripp-68552 · 10/10 · 17 October 2018]

Yes, it's a different show without Roseanne but it was still funny.

Jackie's attempt at the kitchen re-org sums up rather nicely what The Conners needed to do to move on from Roseanne

[Ed-Shullivan · 7/10 · 17 October 2018]

Obviously this spin-off series from Roseanne needed to first achieve closure from the family matriarch Roseanne. Just like with any other death in our own family, we discuss the deceased with endearment and our fondest memories and so this new TV spin-off "The Conners" did exactly that. I saw this pilot episode still contained the Conners family as a whole and with time permitted, The Conners will persevere and find their own comedic way with that same old tinge of dramedy in their weekly storylines.

I see a lot of other IMDB viewers want to kill the series early. I say give The Conners a full first season and let's wait and see if the storylines remain current and possibly include the polarization of the U.S. politics with stories relating to the political positions of the Democratic and Republican parties on major issues such as taxes, the role of government, entitlements (Social Security, Medicare), gun control, immigration, healthcare, abortion, environmental policy and regulation.

The Conners still have a lot to say and I have a feeling a lot of the initial IMDB low reviews are "fake reviewers" whose worse fear is that the Conners message just may hit a wider TV audience as progressive in their views. Lets wait and see how Jackie and the rest of the Conner clan reorganize the Conner kitchen and the rest of their lives without Roseanne before passing judgement.

I give the series pilot a 7 out of 10 rating with a wait and see approach to see if The Conners show can remain current in its issues and with good dramedy.

Terrible show.

[janmanuel2 · 1/10 · 25 March 2019]

I actually thought the new reboot was a little awkward even with Roseanne. Too much political correctness interjected. I love Roseanne and her relationships with Dan and Jackie and it wasn't bad. I would have kept watching it and it may have evolved into another special show. Now that she's gone, it's so awful. Sara Gilbert cannot carry a show. She's an abrasive character. As she grew into a teen in the original series, she quickly became my least favorite character. Maybe in real life she should be greatful for the wonderful career she had due to Roseanne. This is a dark show now. The characters had many problems (mostly economic) in the first series, but they had a wonderful love for each other. I'm buying the entire series, I never tire of it. Roseanne is a very talented woman and made that show special. I'm reading comments that the negative reviews are made by people upset at her being fired. Well, you could say just the opposite about the 9s and 10s on here. Really? Even if you like the show ( go figure) is is not worthy of the highest score possible. I predict that the network will never cancel this show ever, just to make a liberal point. They will continue to prop it up no matter how much money it loses.